George  Washington  Flowers 
Memorial  Collection 

DUKE  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARY 


ESTABLISHED  BY  THE 

FAMILY  OF 

COLONEL   FLOWERS 


IN  EQUITY. 

CHARLESTON    DISTRICT, 


•     WILLIAM   RAVENEL.  anj)  others, 

EXECrroils    OF    THOMAS    BENNF.TT    LUCAS. 
VS. . 

(MR8.    MARY   CATHARINE    LUCAS, 

AND    OTHERS. 

Bill  for  Account  and  Settlement  of  Estate. 


BEFORE. MR.  TUPPER,  MASTER. 

PETIGRU  &  KING, 

MEMMINGER,  JERYEY  &  WILKINSON, 

SoUcltorii  for  Plaintiff-'^. 

NELSON  MITCHELL,  BROWN  &,  PORTER, 

MACBETFI  &  BUIST,  W HALEY  &  LORD, 

SLMONS  &  SIMONS,  .TAMES  B.  CAMPBELL. 

McCRADY  &  SON,  WILLIAM  WHALEY, 
HAYNE  &  MILES,  Solicitors  for  Defendants. 


"•■p 


CHARLESTON 


STEAM-POWER      PRESSES      OF      EVANS      It      COOS  WK  LI, 

Xos.  3  Broad  and  103  East  Bay  Streets. 


1861. 


IN  EQUITY-CHARLESTON. 


WILLIAM  RAVENEL,  d  al,  Executors  of  THOMAS 
BENKETT  LUCAS, 

vs. 
MARY  OATHERIXE  LUCAS,  et  al. 


Report  of  JAMES  TIPPER,  Master  in  Equity. 


To  the  honorable  the  Chancellors : 

On  the  7th  March,  1860,  I  submitted  a  report  upon  the 
evidence  which  had  been  taken  in  this  case  up  to  that 
time. 

On  the  16th  !N^overaber,  1860,  an  order  was  made  by 
Chancellor  Carroll,  recommitting  the  said  report,  witli  in- 
structions to  the  Master  "  to  take  the  accounts  of  the  exec- 
utors and  report  thereon ;  and  also  as  to  the  claim  of  the 
widow  to  dower,  and  of  the  other  parties  in  interest  before 
the  Court."  And  on  the  8th  February,  1861,  it  being  then 
suggested  that  such  an  account  could  not  be  properly  taken 
without  making  the  creditors  parties  according  to  the  course 
of  this  Court,  it  was  ordered,  by  Chancellor  Dunkin,  that 
the  Master  "give  notice  in  the  public  gazettes  of  Charles- 
ton to  the  creditors  of  the  said  Thomas  Bennett  Lucas  to 
prove  their  demands  before  him  on  or  before  the  Ist  day 
of  April,  1861 ;  and  that,  in  case  of  their  failure  to  come 


ill  and  prove  their  i^aid  deinaiuls,  they  be  excluded  from 
the  benefit  of  the  decree  in  this  case." 

The  accounts  of  the  executors  have  been  submitted  and 
examined.  Xo  objection  has  been  made  to  them.  They 
are  herewitli  file.d  as  Exhibit  A.  The  casli  balance  in  the 
executors'  hands  on  the  19th  May,  18G1,  when  the  accounts 
were  closed,  was  $1)0,510  31.  In  addition  to  this  sum, 
there  is  to  the  credit  of  the  executors,  in  tlic  Savings  In- 
stitution of  this  city,  the  following  amounts  : 

Deposited  by  them  on  the  12th  Dec,  IHoti $  4,500 

And  on  the  29th  March,  18G0 20,500 


In  all $25,000 

These  deposits,  it  is  understood,  were  made  to  meet  the 
claim  of  the  widow  to  dower.  The  scheme  of  tliis  report, 
however,  requires  that  the  aliove  deposits  be  not  separated 
from  the  general  assets  of  the*  estate.  I  have,  therefore, 
added  them  to  the  balance  of  $90,510  31,  admitted  by  the 
executors'  accounts  to  be  in  their  hands,  which  makes  the 
cash  $11^,510  31.  The  executors  also  hold  bonds  due  to 
the  estate  of  their  testator  for  $18,140,  and  simple  contract 
demands  against  sundry  delators  of  the  estate  for  $11,(381 
06.  These  assets  are  reiiresented  to  be  good,  and  with  one 
exception,  viz:  a  claim  on  open  account  against  James  B. 
Campl)ell,  Esquire,  for  $2,494  42,  are  supposed  to  be  avail- 
able for  the  payment  of  the  debts  of  the  estate.  To  the 
claim  against  Mr.  Campbell  a  discount  has  been  set  oft' and 
established  by  proof  for  an  amount  which  exceeds  by  $161 
31  the  claim  of  the  estate  against  him,  Mr.  Canqobell 
claims  other  demands  against  the  estate  of  Lucas,  but  of 
these  no  proof  has  been  furnished.  Erom  the  schedule 
of  the  assets  of  the  estate,  I  have  deducted  the  claim 
against  Mr.  Campbell,  and  })laced  the  balance  in  his  favor 
among  the  debts  on  simple  contract  due  by  the  estate. 
The  true  sum  of  the  cash  and  uncollected  assets  thus  ascer- 
tained is  found  to  be  $142,836  95,  as  appears  by  Exhibit  B. 
Pursuant  to  the  order  of  the  8th  Eebruary,  1861,  notice 
was  given,  for  four  weeks,  in  the  daily  morning  papers  of 


Cc/nJ. 


the  city,  to  the  creditors  of  the  hate  Thomas  Bennett  Lucas, 
to  come  in  and  prove  their  demands  before  the  1st  day  of 
April,  1861,  or  failing  to  do  so  that  they  would  be  excluded 
from  the  benefit  ot  the  decree  to  be  made  in  this  cause. 
Under  this  order  a  large  number  of  claims  has  been  pre- 
sented. Many  of  these  claims  were  not  disputed,  and  hav- 
ing been  proved  in  tlie  usual  way  are  allowed.  Upon 
others,  questions  are  raised  which  require  tlie  adjudication 
of  the  Court  l)efore  a  final  settlement  of  the  estate  can  be 
etiected. 

1.  The  first  claim  of  this  kind  is  upon  a  joint  and  several 
bond  of  J.  B.  Campbell  aud  Thomas  Bmnett  Lucas,  dated  the 
20th  January,  1858,  and  conditioned  for  the  payment  to 
William  AVhaley,  administrator  of  Dr.  G.  W.  Morris,  of 
$3,500,  in  five  equal  successive  annual  instalments,  with 
interest  from  date,  payable  annually.  The  interest  has 
been  paid  to  the  1st  March,  1859.  The  evidence  taken 
upon  this  claim  is,  that  the  "  bond  was  given  for  the  pur- 
chase money  of  ten  slaves,  bought  by  Mr.  Campbell  from 
the  estate  of  George  W.  Morris.  That  the  bond  was 
secured  by  a  mortgage  of  the  slaves,  and  b\'  the  personal 
security  of  T.  B.  Lucas,  as  a  joint  obligor  of  the  bond. 
Mr.  Campbell  is  in  possession  of  the  negroes."  The 
obligee  insists  upon  his  legal  right  to  come  in  as  a  bond 
creditor  of  Thomas  Bennett  Lucas,  and  receive  payment 
out  of  his  estate.  The  w^ell-established  doctrine  of  this 
Court  is,  that  the  surety  is  entitled  to  the  benefit  of  all  the 
securities  which  the  creditor  obtains  from  the  debtor  for 
the  payment  of  the  debt,  and  that  the  creditor  must  exhaust 
these  before  he  can  come  on  the  surety  for  payment.  It 
does  not  appear  from  anything  before  me  that  the  mort- 
gaged property  is  insutficient  to  pay  the  debt  in  full.  The 
sum  of  the  bond  for  principal  and  interest  is  $4,030  12, 
and  a  mortgage  of  ten  slaves  would  seem  to  be  ample  secu- 
rity for  a  debt  of  that  amount.  But  this  may  not  be  the 
case  at  this  particular  time.  The  obligee  of  the  bond  is 
clearly  entitled  to  rank  as  a  specialty  creditor  of  the  estate 


of  T.  B.  Lucas,  to  the  extent  of  any  deficiency  in  the  mort- 
o^age  security  to  meet  his  ileniand  in  full,  and  I  so  find. 

2.  The  second  claim  is  made  on  behalf  of  the  holders  ot 
sundry  Bills  of  Ex<-haiun\  drawn  by  Tluuiias  Bennett  Lucas, 
on  Thomas  Scott  and  Wilbur  k  Price,  of  Xew  York,  and 
accepted  by  them.  The  bills  are  under  protest  in  the  hands 
of  certain  banks  and  citizens  of  this  State,  who  claim,  as 
holders  of  said  protested  bills,  to  rank  as  specialty  creditors 
in  the  distribution  of  Mr.  Lucas'  estate.  This  claim  is 
founded  upon  the  A.  A.,  178G,  4  Stat,  at  Large,  page  741, 
sec.  2,  which  provides,  among  other  things,  that  ''  all  cred- 
itors on  protested  bills  of  exchange,  wlien  the  drawers  or 
endorsers  shall  be  dead,  shall  be  upon  an  equality  with 
bond  creditors,  any  law,  usage  or  custom,  to  the  contrary 
notwithstanding."  Against  this  it  is  urged  that  the  fore- 
going provision  of  the  Act  of  1786  is  repealed,  by  implica- 
tion, by  the  "Executors'  Act"  of  1789,  5  Stat,  at  Large, 
p.  111.  The  latter  Act  prescribes  the  order  in  which  debts 
of  testators  and  intestates  are  to  be  paid.  Among  the  debts 
enumerated  hj  this  act  are  "bonds  and  other  obligations," 
and  "  debts  due  on  open  accounts."  Luiless  bills  of  ex- 
change can  be  classed  under  t)ne  of  these  two  heads,  there 
is  clearly  no  description  of  debts  in  this  Act  which  includes 
them.  And  it  does  not  seem  to  me  that  they  can  properly 
fall  within  the  denomination  of  either  bonds,  obligations 
or  open  accounts.  These  terms  have  a  definite  legal  signi- 
fication, and  describe  a  class  of  debts  entirely  distinct  from 
bills  and  promissory  notes.  If  bills  of  exchange  are  not 
included  among  the  debts  enumerated  in  the  Act  of  1789, 
then  there  is  no  such  contrariety  or  repugnance  between 
that  Act  and  the  Act  of  1786,  as,  in  my  view,  indicates  an 
intention  on  the  part  of  the  Legislature  to  repeal  the  Act 
of  1786.  And  so  it  was  held  in  the  case  of  Me  dure  vs. 
Exors.  of  Polony,  a  ms,  decision  referred  to  in  1  Rice's 
Digest,  318.  It  does  not  appear  from  the  brief  statement 
furnished  me  of  this  case,  whether  the  foreign  bills,  there 
held  to  rank  as  specialty  debts  under  the  Act  of  1786,  w^ere 


protested  before  or  after  the  death  of  the  drawer.  This,  it 
has  been  argued,  is  a  material  circiunstance.  Although 
not  so  regarding  it,  the  exceptants  to  the  view  I  have  taken 
are. entitled  to  luive  the  fact  certified  to  the  Court,  that  all 
the  bills  established  in  the  present  case  matured,  and  were 
protested  for  non-payment  after  the  death  of  Mr.  Lucas, 
the  drawer. 

The  foreign  bills  presented  and  proved  under  the  call  for 
creditors,  in  this  case,  arc  set  down  in  Schedule  C.  The 
aggregate  sum  due  upon  these  bills  is  $126,255  04.  This 
includes  interest  on  the  said  bills  to  tlie  1st  April,  1861 — 
to  which  day  all  the  statements  of  this  report  are  made 
up — and,  also,  ten  per  cent,  for  "damages"  allowed  by 
the  Act  of  1786  on  "the  sum  drawn  for."  Certain  col- 
laterals Avere  lodged  by  Mr.  Lucas,  during  his  life,  with 
the  Bank  of  Charleston,  to  secure  the  payment  of  the 
bills  drawn  on  Thomas  Scott.  One  of  these  collaterals 
was  a  policy  of  life  insurance  for  $40,000,  from  which 
$39,000  had  been  realized  and  applied  rateably  to  the  bills 
before  they  were  rendered  to  this^  office.  The  amount 
above  given  ($126,255  04)  is  the  balance  due  after  credit- 
ing the  said  payments.  The  remaining  collaterals,  still 
held  b}^  the  Bank  of  Charleston,  consist  of 
S6|  shares  in  the  capital  stock  of  the  "  Cannonsboro'  Mill 
Company,"  standing  in  the  name  of  T.  Bennett  Lucas, 

the  par  value  of  which  is  $1,000  per  share $36,500 

Bond  of  Henry  E.  Lucas  to  T.  Bennett  Lucas  (se- 
cured b}''  a  second  mortgage  of  "  Crow  Island 
Plantation,"  also  by  a  first  mortgage  of  "Kinloch 
Swamp,"  and  by  a  first  mortgage  of  twenty-six 

negroes),  for 31,500 

Two  Bonds  of  Courtney  and  Simonton  (secured  by 

mortgage  of  lots  in  street),  for 3,400 

Li  adjusting  the  estate  of  Lucas,  these  collaterals  must 
be  regarded  as  assets.  If  not  applied  by  the  holders  to 
the  particular  debts  for  which  they  are  held  as  security, 
and  these  debts  are  paid  out  of  the  general  assets,  then 
the  collaterals   revert   to   the    estate.     In  any  event   it  is 


important,  for  the  purposes  of  tliis  report,  tliat  the  value 
of  these  securities  should  he  ascertained  and  set  ott"  against 
the  liahilities  of  the  estate;  and  it  cannot  aftect  the  final 
result  of  the  account  if  thev  are  set  off  asjainst  the  par- 
ticular  liahilities  for  the  payment  of  which  they  are  now 
hypothecated.  Testimony  luis  been  taken  as  to  the  value 
of  the  sesecurities.  As  to  the  stock  in  the  Caunonsboro' 
Mill  Comjiany,  it  has  been  intimated  that  there  is  some 
claim  now  being  prosecuted  by  the  said  Company  in 
another  cause  in  this  Court,  for  which  chiini  the  shares 
of  Mr.  Lucas  in  said  Comi)any  are  said  to  be  liable.  Of 
the  nature  of  this  claim  I  liave  no  official  information. 
The  evidence  before  me,  liowever,  shows  that  an  offer 
was  made  by  the  President  of  the  Caunonsboro'  Mill  Com- 
pany to  purchase  from  the  executors  of  Mr.  Lucas  the 
shares  standing  in  their  testator's  name,  subject  to  all 
claims,  for  ten  thousand  dollars,  and  that  this  offer  was 
declined,  being  considered  far  below  the  value  of  the  said 
shares.  I  liave,  therefore,  assumed  ten  thousand  dollars 
as  the  minimum  value  of  this  stock.  As  to  the  other 
securities  held  by  the  Bank  of  Charleston,  the  testimony 
is  that  the  land  mortgaged  to  secure  the  bond  of  Henry 
E.  Lucas,  who  is  insolvent,  viz  :  "Crow  Island  Plantation" 
and  "Kinloch  Swamp,"  adjoining  said  plantation,  would 
"be  a  cheap  i)roperty"  at  the  present  time  at  $15,000. 
This  sum  would  be  sufficient  to  pay  off  the  prior  incum- 
brance of  $6,700  upon  the  said  land,  and  leave  $8,300  to  be 
applied  to  the  bond  of  Henry  E.  Lucas,  in  the  possession 
of  the  Bank.  The  market  value  of  the  negroes  mortgaged 
to  secure  the  same  bond  has  been  set  down  at  $16,200. 
The  bonds  of  Courtney  and  Simonton  for  $3,400,  are  re- 
presented as  good.  The  aggregate  value  of  the  above 
collateral  securities  are  thus  ascertained  to  be  $37,900. 
This  sum  deducted  from  the  balance  due  upon  the  foreign 
bills  of  excluuige  ($126,255  04)  will  leave  $88,355  04  to  be 
paid  out  of  the  general  estate  of  Mr.  Lucas  in  the  hands 
of  his    executors.     Considering  these   bills   as  specialties 


they  are  the  only  debts  of  this  ranlc  to  be  provided  for  in 
the  future  administration  of  the  estate.  In  this  I  assume 
that  the  bond  hekl  by  the  administrator  of  the  estate  of 
Morris  will  be  paid  out  of  the  negroes  mortgaged  to 
secure  it. 

3.  The  third  claim  is  submitted  on  behalf  of  the  widow 

for  her  dower. 

Thomas  Bennett  Lucas  died  seized  of  the  following  real 

estate,  which  has  been  sold  by  his  executors: 

West  Point  Mills,  sold  for $07,000 

Dwelling-house,  "        25,000 

Lot  on  Commercial  wharf,  sold  for " 1,825 

Lot  corner  of  Palmetto  St.,       "       1,130 

In  all $124,955 

The  West  Point  Mills,  together  with  thirty-six  negroes 
and  a  schooner  called  the  Hettiwan,  was  subject,  at  the 
time  of  the  death  of  Mr.  Lucas,  to  a  mortsraffe  securing 
three  bonds,  given  for  the  purchase  money,  amounting  to 
$65,507  QQ.  The  land  embraced  in  the  said  mortgage  was 
sold  by  the  executors,  as  above  stated,  for  $97,000.  The 
thirty-six  negroes  and  schooner  were  sold  by  them  (as 
appears  by  Schedule  D)  for  $31,322.  A  rateable  apportion- 
ment of  the  mortgage  debt  between  the  real  and  personal 
property  embraced  in  the  mortgage,  according  to  their 
respective  values,  will  give  a  charge  upon  the  land  of 
$49,518  70,  and  upon  the  negroes  and  schooner  of 
$15,988  96.  The  dwelling-house  lot  was  subject  to  the 
lien  of  a  mortgage  securing  a  bond  for  $11,112  50  given 
for  the  purchase  money.  Upon  the  lot  on  Commercial 
wharf  and  the  lot  on  Palmetto  street  there  were  no  special 
incumbrances.  The  bonds  secured  by  the  foregoing  mort- 
gages have  all  been  paid  by  the  executors,  from  the  pro- 
ceeds of  the  sales  of  the  realty  and  personalty.  The  estate, 
while  not  sufficient  to  pay  all  the  debts  of  the  testator,  is 
sufficie^nt  to  pay  all  the  specialty  debts,  including  the  for- 


eign  bills  of  exchange  claimed  to  rank  as  such.  The 
widow  claims  comj^ensation  for  hor  dower-  out  of  the  assets 
still  remaining  iii  the  hands  of  the  executors. 

The  case  of  Wilson  vs.  McConnell,  9  Rich.  Eq.  R.,  504, 
furnishes  the  rule  for  the  assessment  of  the  dower  in  this 
case.  In  the  former  case  it  was  held  that  a  husband  dying 
insolvent,  his  widow  is  entitled  to  have  the  proceeds  of  the 
sales  of  his  personal  estate  ajtjdied  to  the  jtayment  rateably 
of  bond  debts  secured  by  mortgages  of  land  with  other 
specialty  demands,  and  that  the  proceeds  of  the  real  estate 
subject  to  dower  should  be  resorted  to  only  for  the  defi- 
ciency in  the  personal  assets,  so  applied,  to  satisfy  the  mort- 
gage liens  upon  the  land. 

In  aiDplying  these  principles  to  the  present  case,  it  is 
necessary  first  to  ascertain  the  value  of  the  personal  estate 
of  the  testator.  This  cannot  now  be  directly  arrived  at. 
The  executors  have  received  considerable  sums  of  money 
from  the  proceeds  of  the  mill  during  the  time  it  was 
worked  by  them;  also  from  the' hire  of  negroes  and  from 
the  collection  of  debts  due  to  the  estate.  These  receipts 
are  included  in  the  general  accounts  of  the  executors, 
which  embrace  all  their  transactions  with  the  estate,  and 
cannot  be  readily  distinguished  and  separated.  The  value 
of  the  personal  estate  may,  however,  be  ascertained  indi- 
i-ectly,  but  with  almost  certainty,  by  deducting  from  the 
gross  sum  of  the  cash  receipts  of  the  executors  and  the 
uncollected  assets  still  in  their  hands,  the  disbursements  on 
account  of  the  mill,  the  expenses  of  administration  and  the 
sales  of  the  real  estate.  The  surplus  will  be  the  amount  of 
the  personal  estate  subject  to  the  payment  of  debts. 
The  cash  received  by  the   executors   from   all 

sources,  as  appears  by  their  accounts,  was. ..$310,028  69 
Add  the  amount  of  the  uncollected  assets  in  their 

hands '  27,320  64 


And  the  gross  value  of  the  entire  estate  is  ob- 
tained, viz $337,355  33 


Then  deduct  the  disbursements  on 
account  of  the  mill  and  the  ex- 
penses of  administration  $55,188  27 

Also,  the  proceeds  of  the  sales  of 

the  real  estate $124,955  00—180,143  27 

And  the  difference $157,212  06 

is  the  amount  of  the  personal  estate.  This,  as  the  primary 
fund  for  the  payment  of  debts,  Avould  be  first  applicable, 
according  to  the  case  of  Wilson  vs.  McConnell,  to  the  pay- 
ment rateably  of  all  the  specialty  demands,  including  debts 
secured  by  mortgage  of  the  land.  But  in  the  case  before 
me,  there  are  bond  debts,  secured  by  mortgage  of  the  per- 
sonalty. In  this  respect,  the  present  case  differs  from  Wil- 
son I's.  McConnell.  Here  the  widow's  equity  to  compel 
the  creditors  secured  by  mortgage  of  the  land,  upon  which 
she  has  a  lien,  to  resort  to  the  personalty  for  pa^-ment,  is 
met  by  a  corresponding  equity  on  the  part  of  creditors  who 
have  a  specific  lien  on  the  personalt}'.  It  seems  to  me  that 
creditors  of  this  class  are  entitled  to  priority  of  payment 
out  of  the  proceeds  of  the  sale  of  the  personalty  mort- 
gaged for  their  security.  I  liave  therefore  deducted  from 
the  amount  of  the  personal  estate  as  above  ascertained, 

viz: $157,212  06 

The  following  debts,  secured  by  mortgages 
of  personal  property  sold  by  the  executors  : 
3  bonds  to  Kosa  Lucas,  Julius  Lucas 
and  Lucy  Lucas,  secured  by  mort- 
gage of  the  West  Point  Mill, 
thirtv-six  negroes  and  a  schooner. 
Rateable   apportionment   of    debt 

to  negroes  and  schooner  $15,988  96 

Bond  to  Augustus  Lucas,  secured  by 

mortgage  of  negroes 18,601  24 

Bohd  to  I^  Ball,  guardian,  secured  by 

mortgage  of  negroes 17,552  39 

Bond  to  R.   DeTreville,  secured  by 

mortgage  of  negroes 23,929  44 

In  all 76,072  03 

Leaving $81,140  03 


10 

to  be  applied  to  tlie    payment  rateably  of  tlie  mortgages 
on  the  land  and  the  unset-nrod  specialty  debts,  viz: 
Proportion  of  bonds  to  Rosa,  Julins  and  Lucy 
Lucas,  secured    by   mortgage  of  West  Point 

Mill  lands !"...' $4i>,518  70 

Bond  to  M.  M.  Lucas,  secured  bv  mortffao^e  of 

dwelling-house  lands 11,112  50 

$60,(J31  20 
Bond  to  P.  J.  Barbot,  unsecured 2,(320  88 

$68,258  08 
Foreign  bills  of  exchange  raidced  as  specialties.  88,355  04 

$151,(118  12 
The  amount  of  the  personalty  ($81,140  03)  applicable  to 
the  i)ayment  of  the  debts  last  enumerated  ($151,613  12)  is 
a  fraction  under  53^  per  cent,  of  the  said  debts.  The 
amount  to  be  applied  to  the  bonds  secured  by  mortgages 
on  the  land  ($60,631  20)  is  $32,4'37  69.  This\vill  leave  a 
deficiency  of  personalty  to  pay  said  mortgage  del)ts  of 
$28,193  51,  and  this  deficiency  is  a  charge  upon  the  mort- 
gaged lands.  These  lands  were  sold  by  the  executors  for 
$122,000.  The  surplus  remaining  after  providing  for  the 
above  deficiency  is  $93,806  49  ;  and  this  sum  added  to  the 
sales  of  the  lands  not  mortgaged,  viz :  lot  on  Commercial 
wharf,  $1,825,  and  lot  on  Palmetto  street,  $1,130— $2,955, 
will  give  the  value  of  the  real  estate  $9(),761  49 — to  one- 
sixth  of  which,  $16,126  91  i,  the  widow  is  entitled  for  her 
dower,  and  I  so  find.  An  account  of  the  particulani  of  the 
foregoing  statement  marked  E,  is  filed  with  this  report. 

It  is  proper  here  to  state  tliat  the  solicitors  of  the  widow, 
under  her  written  instructions,  waive  'her  claim  for  dower 
out  of  such  portions  of  the  real  estate  of  her  husband  as 
her  children  may  be  held  entitled  to  under  the  will  of  their 
grandfather,  Jonathan  Lucas. 

4.  Claim  of  Children.  It  is  submitted  that  under  the 
will  of  Jonathan  Lucas,  his  grandchildren,  the  children  of 


11 

T.  Bennett  Lucas,  are  entitled  to  the  share  which  their 
father  took  under  the  said  will.  And  that  the  said  sliare 
having  heen  received  hy  T.  Bennett  Lucas,  in  land  and 
ne<i;roes,  which  wove  sold  after  his  death,  the  proceeds  of 
said  sale  are  suhjecty^ro  taiito  to  a  lien  for  the  claim  of  the 
said  children,  under  the  limitations  of  the  will  of  their 
grandfather,  Jonathan  Lucas. 

Jonathan  Lucas  died  in  May,  1848,  leaving  a  will  dated 
the  25th  August,  1847,  whereby  he  devised  all  his  estate  to 
his  executors  and  their  survivors,  in  trust,  to  manage  aiid 
conduct  his  mill  and  planting  establishments  until  all  his 
children  should  marry  or  attain  tAventy-one  years  of  age,  or 
until  his  last  surviving  minor  child  should  depart  this  life; 
and  directing  that,  in  the  mean  time,  his  executors  should 
apply  the  net  income  of  the  estate  to  the  payment  of  his 
del)ts  and  to  the  support  and  education  of  his  children 
who  may  be  unmarried  and  under  twenty-one  years  of  age; 
and,  also,  to  tlie  support  and  education  of  the  child  or 
children  of  any  of  his  children  already  dead,  or  who  might 
thereafter  die  before  the  time  appointed  for  the  division  of 
his  estate.  The  testator  then  provides  for  the  division  of 
the  estate,  as  follows: 

"2.  When  all  my  children  shall  have  married,  or  attained 
twenty-one  years  of  age,  or  when  my  last  surviving  minor 
child  shall  depart  this  life  under  twenty-one,  in  case  that 
should  happen  to  occur,  then  my  executors  shall  divide  and 
apportion  all  my  estate,  as  it  shall  then  stand,  in  equal  parts 
among  all  my  children  who  shall  be  living  when  the  last  of 
my  minor  children  surviving  each  other  shall  marry  or 
attain  twenty-one  years  of  age,  or  shall  happen  to  die  before 
attaining  such  age.  But  grandchildren  shall  be  substituted 
in  the  place  of  any  parent  who  is  now  dead  or  who  may 
hereafter  die,  and  shall  take  respectively  the  share  which 
the  parent,  if  living,  would  have  taken.  And  my  executors 
shall  take  care  that  the  share  of  each  daughter,  or  of  a  sub- 
stituted granddaughter,  shall  be  settled  to  her  sole  use, 
free  from  the  debt  or  engagements  of  any  husband  she  may 
marry. 


12 

"3.  I  expressly  subject  eat-li  and  every  slmro  given  as 
aforesaid  to  the  followin<r  limitations,  that  is  to  say,  in  case 
any  of  my  cliildren  sliall  die  without  leaving  issue  living  at 
the  time  of  its  decease,  or  in  case  such  issue  of  any  child 
shall  die  unmarried  ami  under  twenty-one  years  of  age,  the 
share  of  such  child  shall  revert  to  my  estate,  and  be  equally 
divided  among  my  other  children,  living  at  the  happening 
of  such  contingency  ;  or  in  case  of  the  death  of  any  child 
having  issue  alive  at  the  happening  of  such  contingency, 
such  issue  to  represent  the  deceased  parent,  and  to  be  en- 
titled to  take  a  share  in  connnon  with  the  other  children. 
And  the  same  rules  shall  ai>ply  to  ever^-  accruing  or  sur- 
vived share  as  to  the  original  one.  And  all  these  limita- 
tions and  conditions  shall  ajiply  as  well  to  the  share  of  my 
daughter  who  has  already  died  and  has  left  issue,  as  also  to 
any  others  of  my  children  who  may  die,  either  before  or 
after  me." 

The  testator  tlien  appoints  his  executors  guardians  of  his 
minor  cliildren,  with  directions  that  their  nuiintenance  and 
education  be  borne  by  his  general  estate. 

The  fourth  and  fifth  clauses  of  the  will  arc  as  follows  : 

"  4.  I  authorize  my  executors,  from  time  to  time,  to  make 
advancements  to  my  children  to  an  extent  not  exceeding 
the  presumptive  share  of  each,  and  to  deliver  the  possession 
and  control  of  the  same  to  any  child  at  any  time  they,  the 
said  executors,  shall  see  fit.  Such  advancements,  however, 
together  with  all  which  nuiy  have  been  made  by  myself, 
shall  be  charged  against  the  shares  of  each  child  to  whom 
the  same  may  have  been  made,  and  shall  constitute  a  }>art 
thereof  in  the  final  division. 

The  advancements  which  may  bo  made  to  any  daughter 
shall  be  settled  in  manner  already  declared;  and  I  exi^ressly 
exonerate  my  executors  from  liability  for  any  waste  or  loss 
which  may  accrue  to  any  advancement  or  share  delivered 
in  pursuance  of  this,  my  will.  And  I  also  declare,  that 
they  are  to  be  indemnified  by  my  estate  for  every  liability, 
loss  or  expense  incurred,  and  shall  be  held  accountable  for 


13 

no  errors  of  judgment  in  their  conduct  as  executors  and 
trustees. 

"  5.  I  authorize  and  empower  my  executors  to  sell  and 
convey  any  portion  of  my  estate  which  they  may  deem  ex- 
pedient, either  for  the  purpose  of  paying  debts  or  making 
a  division,  or  in  the  conduct  or  management  of  the  busi- 
ness. And  if  in  their  opinion  circumstances  should  require 
a  division  of  my  estate,  in  wliole  or  in  part,  before  the 
period  which  I  have  named,  I  fully  authorize  my  executors 
to  make  such  division,  and  to  deliver  the  property  into  the 
hands  of  the  legatees  and  devisees — such  property,  how- 
ever, to  remain  subject  in  their  hands  to  the  limitations 
already  declared." 

A  cop}-  of  the  entire  will  is  tiled  with  this  report. 

The  estate  devised  by  the  testator  to  each  of  his  chibh-en 
is  clearly  a  vested  estate,  subject  to  be  divested  by  death 
before  the  youngest  child  nuirries  or  attains  twenty-one 
years  of  age,  with  remainder  over  to  the  children  of  such 
deceased  child  limited,  as  in  the  prior  devise,  on  their  liv- 
ing at  the  time  when  the  estate  should  become  absolute  and 
indefeasible,  ?'.  c,  when  the  youngest  surviving  child  of  tes- 
tator should  marry  oi*  attain  the  age  of  twenty-one. 

Thomas  Bennett  Lucas,  one  of  the  children  of  Jonathan 
Lucas,  died  in  1850,  leaving  foiir  children,  all  of  whom  are 
minors.  Two  of  the  surviving  children  of  Jonathan  Lucas, 
Augustus  and  Lucy,  are  yet  under  twenty-one  years  of  age, 
and  unmarried.  Under  these  circumstances,  it  is  conceded, 
I  believe,  that  the  children  of  Thomas  Bennett  Lucas  would 
be  entitled  to  the  estate  devised  to  them,  unless  the  event 
upon  which  the  estate  was  to  become  absolute  and  inde- 
feasible happened  in  the  lifetime  of  their  father,  the  prior 
devisee.  And  this  event  it  is  contended  is  not  the  marriage 
or  majority  of  the  youngest  child  of  the  testator,  as  I  have 
assumed,  but  the  period  of  the  division  of  the  estate,  which 
division  the  evidence  shows  was  made  during  the  life  of 
Thomas  Bennett  Lucas. 

The  intention  of  tho  testator  that  no  tinal  and  absolute 


14 

division  of  Ijis  estate  should  take  jtlace  before  his  yonng*est 
child  married  or  arrived  at  full  age,  seems  to  me  to  be  clear. 
This  intention  is  apiiarent  from  the  directions  given  in  the 
will  for  the  management  of  the  estate  by  the  executors, 
and  for  the  appropriation  by  them  of  the  income  until  that 
period  ;  also,  bv  the  provision  made  for  the  maintoiiaucc 
and  education  of  the  testator's  minor  children  and  grand- 
children out  of  his  general  estate;  also,  l)y  the  exoneration 
of  the  executors  from  liability  for  any  waste  or  loss  which 
might  accrue  to  any  sliarc  advanced  by  them  licibre  the 
period  of  division  fixed  by  the  will,  and  lastly,  by  the  ex- 
plicit limitations  ot  the  will  itself.  It  is  true  that  authoi-ity 
is  given  to  the  executors  to  make  a  division  of  the  estate 
before  the  youngest  child  marries  or  attains  full  age.  But 
this  authority  is  coupled  with  an  express  declaration  that 
the  property  in  that  event  shall  remain  in  the  hands  of  the 
legatees  and  devisees  subject  to  the  limitations  of  the  will. 
And  so  it  seems  to  have  been  held  upon  a  bill  filed  by  the 
executors  in  1855,  asking,  among  other  things,  for  the  in- 
struction of  the  Court  upon  the  eonstruction  of  this  will,  as 
to  their  duty  to  reserve  a  fund  for  the  support  and  educa- 
tion of  the  minor  children  and  grandchildren  of  the  tes- 
tator. A  division  of  the  estate  was  then  made,  or  was 
about  to  be  made,  under  the  authority  given  to  the  execu- 
tors by  the  will.  The  Chancellor  who  heard  the  case  held 
"  that  provision  must  be  made  for  tlie  support  and  educa- 
tion of  the  minor  children  ot  the  testator  at  ihc  general 
expense  of  the  whole  in  any  scheme  of  division  wliich  may 
be  adopted."  This  decision  was  appealed  from  on  the 
ground  that  the  division  of  the  whole  estate  during  the 
minority  of  the  children  or  grandchildren  was  left  by  the 
testator  to  the  discretion  of  his  executors,  whose  decision 
to  divide  the  estate  concluded  the  (juestion,  and  necessarily 
cast  the  sujijiort  and  education  of  tl)e  minors  upon  their 
res})ective  portions  oidy.  The  objection  now  urged  to  the 
claim  of  the  children  is  substantially  the  same.  It  is  now, 
as  then,  insisted  that  the  whole  scheme  of  the  will  is  based 
upon  the  discretion  of  the  executors  to  fix  the  period  of 


15 

division,  and  that  the  riglits  of  all  parties  under  the  will 
are  to  be  fixed  and  determined  hy  that  discretion.  The 
Court*  of  Appeals  affirmed  the  decree  of  the  Chancellor 
upon  the  case  then  made ;  and  although  the  question  now 
under  consideration  was  not  then  immediately  before  the 
Court,  its  determination  is  necessarily  involved,  as  it  seems 
to  me,  in  tlie  decision  then  made,  that  the  rights  of  tlie 
children  and  grandchildren  to  maintenance  and  education 
out  of  the  general  estate,  were  not  to  be  affected  by  the  ex- 
ercise of  the  discretion  of  the  executors  in  fixing  a  period 
for  distribution  anterior  to  that  fixed  by  the  will.  If  the 
exercise  of  that  discretion  could  not  deprive  the  grandchil- 
dren of  their  interest  in  the  income  of  the  estate,  much  less 
can  that  discretion  destroy  their  interest  in  the  estate  itself. 
Aiid  tlie  authorities  seem  to  be  clear,  that  if  a  trust  in  favor 
of  certain  objects  be  once  expressly  created,  a  discretionary 
power  in  the  trustees,  however  ample,  will  not  do  away 
widi  the  ett'ect  of  the  trust  previously  declared. 

The  rights  of  the  children  under  the  will  of  their  grand- 
father being  ascertained,  the  next  inquiry  is,  whether  the 
share  of  the  estate  which  went  into  the  possession  of  their 
father  upon  the  division  made  in  1858,  can  now  be  traced 
and  distinguished,  so  as  to  enure  to  the  benefit  of  the  said 
children  to  the  exclusion  of  the  creditors  of  Thomas  Ben- 
nett Lucas.  In  my  report  of  the  7th  March,  1860,  the  evi- 
dence then  taken  upon  this  point  was  submitted.  For 
convenience  of  reference  this  evidence,  together  with  such 
facts  as  have  subsequently  been  lirought  to  my  attention, 
are  embraced  in  the  following  statement: 

The  executors  of  the  will  of  Jonathan  Lucas,  upon  the 
request  of  the  adult  children,  and  with  the  •concurrence  of 
their  own  judgment,  proceeded,  in  1853,  to  sell  the  estate 
of  their  testator  for  the  purpose  of  making  a  division.  On 
the  12th  July,  1858,  Thomas  Bennett  Lucas,  the  eldest  son 
of  the  testator,  purchased  the  AVest  Point  Mills  establish- 
ment, with  thirty-six  negroes  and  a  schooner,  for  $108,000, 
payable  in  cash  and  bonds.     In  payment  of  the  cash,  the 


16 

executors  received  from  liiiii  $25,000,  wliicli  was  raised  by 
his  giving  to  tlie  executors  the  folh)\ving  recei[)t : 

"Charleston,  July  12th,  18;")3.  Received  from  William 
Lucas.  C.  G.  Memniinger,  and  W.  J.  Bennett,  Executors 
of  Jonathan  Lucas,  twenty-five  thousand  dollars,  on  ac- 
count of  my  share  of  the  Estate  of  said  Jonathan  X^ucas, 
to  be  adjusted  upon  the  final  division  thereof. 

"T.  B.  LUCAS. 

"In  the  presence  of  James  B.  Campbell." 

The  executors  thereupon  made  the  following  entries  in 
their  accounts.  On  the  debit  side  they  charge,  "Thomas 
B,  Lucas,  paid  liim  on  account  of  his  share  of  estate, 
$25,000."  And  on  the  credit  side,  they  credit  the  estate 
as  "received  from  T.  B.  Lucas,  on  account  sales  of  AVest 
Point  Mills,  $25,000." 

For  the  balance  of  the  purchase,  T.  B.  Lucas  executed 
to  the  executors  three  bonds,  in  the  sum  of  $21,000  each, 
and  one  for  $20,000,  secured  b}-  mortgage  of  the  property 
sold. 

The  property  was  all  delivered  up  to  T.  B.  Lucas  as  pur- 
chaser; and  the  bonds  remained  in  hands  of  the  executors 
Avith  the  pi'oceeds  of  sales  of  the  other  property  of  the  tes- 
tator. 

Li  June,  1853,  under  proceedings  in  the  Court  of  Chan- 
cery, a  partition  of  the  whole  estate  was  made,  and  by  the 
Master's  (Mr.  Grray)  report,  tlie  whole  estate  Avas  adjusted. 
By  that  report,  it  was  ascertained  that  Thomas  Bennett 
Lucas  was  entitled  to  a  further  sum  of  $2,400  44,  which, 
under  the  decree  of  the  Court,  was  paid  over  to  him  by  the 
executors  on  the  Ist  June,  1855,  in  full  of  his  share ;  and 
the  following  receipt  was  taken  from  him  : 

"Charleston,  July  9th,  1855.  Received  from  C.  G. 
Memminger,  Executor  of  the  Estate  Jonathan  Lucas, 
two  thousand  four  hundred  dollars  44  cents,  being  the 
balance  of   my  share  of  the  estate,  as  per  decree  of  the 

Court  of  Equity. 

"T.  B.  LUCAS. 
"$2,400  44." 


17 

This  payment  by  the  executor  was  made  by  setting  oft 
the  amount  against  the  interest  due  on  certain  bonds  of 
T.  Bennett  Lucas,  given  for  the  purchase  of  property  from 
the  estate  of  Jonathan  Lucas,  viz  : 
$1,009  94.     Interest   written   oft"  from    bond   for  $10,500, 

given  for  purchase  of  dwelling-house. 
$1,093  93.  Interest  written  oft"  from  bond  for  $17,605, 
given  for  negroes  not  embraced  in  the  West 
Point  Mill  purchase. 
$  269  57.  Interest  written  off"  from  one  of  the  four  bonds 
given  for  the  purchase  of  the  "  West  Point 
establishment." 

In  the  June  term,  1856,  the  Master  (Mr.  Gray)  reported 
that  the  above  sum  of  $2,400  44  had  been  paid  over  to  T. 
Bennett  Lucas  by  the  executors,  and  that  they  had  full}' 
administered  the  estate  and  accounted  for  the  same. 

The  bonds  given  by  T.  Bennett  Lucas  for  the  several 
purchases  made  by  him  were  assigned  under  the  decree  of 
the  Court  to  pay  the  shares  of  the  other  devisees  and 
legatees.  That  portion  of  tlic  decree  which  relates  to  the 
present  subject  matter  is  as  follows  :  * 

"  On  hearing  the  report  of  the  Master,  it  is  ordered  that 
the  same  be  confirmed,  and  that  the  complainants  (the 
executors)  do  give  the  credits  and  assign  the  bonds,  stocks 
and  securities,  and  pay  the  cash  balances  to  the  several 
legatees  who  have  attained  the  age  of  twenty-one  years, 
according  to  the  allotment  contained  in  Schedule  Xo.  6, 
filed  with  said  report,  etc. 

"It  is  further  ordered,  that  each  of  the  adult  defendants 
and  the  guardians  of  each  of  the  infants,  do  contribute  the 
sum  of  three  hundred  and  ten  dollars  annually  to  a  com- 
mon fund  for  the  support  of  the  infants,  as  recommended 
in  the  report,  to  be  paid  to  the  Master  in  half  yearly  pay- 
ments, in  advance,  on  the  first  of  every  July  and  January, 
until  otherwise  ordered  by  the  Court,  etc." 

All  the  bonds  given  by  T.  Bennett  Lucas  for  his  pur- 
chases from  the  estate  of  Jonathan  Lucas  have  been  paid 
and  the  mortgages  satisfied.     Of  the  four  bonds  given  for 
2 


18 

the  "AVest  Point  establishment"  one  was  }»ai<l  in  the  life- 
time of  Mr.  Liieas,  and  the  remaining  three  hv  his  execu- 
tors since  his  death.  Mr.  Lucas  died  in  possession  of  all 
the  land  and  negroes  referred  to  in  the  foregoing  state- 
ment. 

It  will  be  convenient  to  consider,  first,  the  claim  of  the 
children  in  rcsj)ect  to  the  $:ir),OOU,  for  which  a  receipt  was 
given  1)\-  Mr.  Lucas  to  the  executors  on  the  Litli  July, 
1853.  It  is  clear  that  no  money  passed  between  the  jiar- 
ties.  Mr.  Lucas  was  the  purchaser  of  the  Mill  establish- 
ment for  $108,000.  Against  this  purchase  was  discounted 
his  "presumptive  share"  in  the  estate  ($25,000),  and  the 
payment  of  the  balance  of  the  purchase  money  was  secured 
by  four  bonds  for  $83,000,  secured  by  a  mortgage  of  the 
land,  negroes  and  schooner  conveyed  to  him  l)y  the  ex- 
ecutors. To  the  extent  of  $25,000,  he  received  his  share 
in  properly.  The  entries  made  b}'  the  executors  in  their 
accounts  with  the  estate  indicate  ujion  their  face  that  they 
received  $25,000  from  Mv.  Lucas  for  the  cash  portion  of 
said  purchase,  and  that  they  immediately  paid  to  Mr.  Lucas 
a  like  sum  on  account  of  his  share  in  the  estate.  \h\t  this 
is  merely  a  mode  of  statement  adopted  by  the  executors  in 
recording  their  transactions  with  the  estate,  and  does  not 
avoid  the  fact  that  T.  Bennett  Lucas  received  the  $25,000 
in  property.  Can  the  property  be  traced  and  distinguished 
80  as  to  enure  to  the  benefit  of  the  children  and  postpone 
the  claims  of  the  general  ci'cditors  of  T.  B.  Lucas  until  the 
trusts  of  the  will  in  favor  of  the  children  are  discharged? 
I  think  it  can.  To  the  extent  of  the  $25,000  Mr.  Lucas 
received  his  share  in  specie.  In  land,  negroes  and  a  ^schooner 
which  were  in  his  possession  when  ho  died,  and  which  were 
sold  by  his  executors,  and  the  proceeds  accounted  for  by 
them. 

If  the  executors  of  «Tonatlian  Lucas,  in  the  division  of 
that  estate,  had  delivered  to  T.  B.  Lucas,  as  his  distributive 
share,  certain  lands  and  negroes,  valued  at  $25,000,  and 
received  an  acknowledgment  from  him  in  which  the  prop- 
erty was  described,  it  can  scarcely  be  doubted  that  he  would 
have  taken  the  property  subject  to  the  limitations  of  the 


19 

will ;  and  if  after  his  death  the  same  property  had  passed 
into  the  hands  of  his  executors,  it  is  equally  clear  that  the 
estate    of  the  children,  in   the  said  property  under    their 
grandfather's  will,  would  have  vested  to  the  exclusion  of 
all  others.     The  only  circumstance  which  creates  douht  is 
the  fact  that  the  property  which  T.  B.  Lucas  received,  on 
account  of  his  share  in  the  estate,  was  mixed  Avith  other 
property-  of  which  he  hecame  possessed  by  purchase  from 
the    same    estate.      And   here,   I    think,    the    weight    of 
authority  is  in  favor  of  the  equitable  lien  of  the  children, 
as  against  the  general  creditors  of  their  father,  who  are  the 
only  parties  whose  interests  arc  prejudiced  by  said  lien. 
AYhether  T.  Bennett  Lucas  be  regarded  as  a  trustee,  under 
the  fifth  clause  of  Jonathan  Lucas'  will,  or  as  a  bona  fide 
purchaser  with  notice  of  the  trust,  the  same   rule  applies 
that  trust  proi)erty  niay  be  followed  whenever  it  is  of  a 
tangible  nature,  and  it  is  imniatcrkd  that  the  trust  property  ift 
blended  ic'dh  other  property  of  the  mme  nature,  belonging  benefi- 
rkdlg  to  the  trustee  or  purchaser  v'ith  Notice.     Hill  on  Trustees, 
531  and  notes.     Price  vs.  Blackmore,  6  Beav.,*507.     The  " 
title  from  the  executors  of  Jonathan  Lucas  to  T.  Bennett 
Lucas  conveys  an  absolute  fee,  and  does  not  refer  to  the 
trusts  of  the  will.     It  is  possible  that  the  creditors  of  T. 
B.  Lucas  may  have  been  thereby  misled  (as  it  is  argued)  in 
their  estimate  of  his  property;   but  the  fact  that  the  con- 
veyance is  made  by  executors  would  seem  to  be  sufficient 
to  put  creditors  on  the  inquiry  as  to  their  title.     Be  this 
however  as  it  may,  the  rule,  as  above  stated,  appears,  so  far 
as  general  creditors  are  concerned,  to  be  inflexible.     Under 
all  the  circumstances,  I  ani  of  opinion  that  the  claim  of  the 
children  of  T.  Bennett  Lucas,  to   the   extent  of  $25,000, 
must  be  regarded  as  a  specific  lien  upon  the  West  Point 
land,  negroes  and  schooner,  and  that  they  are  entitled  to 
priority  of  payment  out  of  the  proceeds  of  sale  of  that 
property. 

Li  addition  to  the  $25,000  received  by  Mr.  Lucas  from 
the  estate  of  his  father,  the  testimony  shows  that  he  subse- 
quently received  from  the  executors  the  sum  of  $2,400  44 
in  full  of  his  share  in  the  estate,  making  the  value  of  the 


1^0 

entire  share  ^27,400  44.  As  to  this  hist  receipt  of  $2,400  44, 
I  have  not  hecu  able  to  attain  tlic  same  conclusion  as  in 
the  matter  of  the  8'25,000.  That  the  $2,400  44  originally 
formed  a  pai't  of  the  share  in  the  ■  estate  of  Jonathan 
Lucas,  which,  at  the  death  of  T.  Bennett  Lucas,  vested  in 
his  children,  I  have  no  douht.  But  it  did  not  remain  in 
specie,  nor  was  it  ever  invested  in  other  property.  Tt  was 
applied  by  the  executors  to  the  payment  of  interest  due 
upon  the  bonds  of  T.  B.  Lucas,  given  for  the  credit  portion 
of  his  purchases  from  the  estate.  And  the  entire  amount, 
except  $2110  57,  was  written  oil:'  from  bonds  given  for  pro})- 
erty  not  embraced  in  the  AVest  Point  Mill  purchase.  All 
the  bonds,  to  the  interest  of  which  the  said  sum  of 
$2,400  44  was  applied,  were  assigned  to  the  other  devisees 
and  legatees  in  settlement  of  their  respective  shares.  The 
interest  accruing  on  these  bonds  was  a  debt  to  them,  not 
for  the  purchase  money  of  the  property  of  which  their  shares 
originally  consisted,  but  as  the  consideration  for  the  indul- 
gence granted  in  the  credit  allowed  to  the  purchaser.  Mr, 
Lucas  had  the  use  of  the  purchase  money,  and,  as  an  equiva- 
lent, the  parties  entitled  to  said  money  received  as  interest 
the  balance  coming  to  him  from  the  estate  on  a  final  settle- 
ment. It  is  not  perceived  how  such  an  appropriation  of  a 
portion  of  his  share  can  be  identified  with  the  property  pur- 
chased by  him  any  more  than  if,  before  the  final  settlement, 
Mr.  Lucas  had  enjoyed  the  })()ssession,  by  hire,  of  property 
subsequently  purchased  by  him,  and  a  portion  of  his  share 
in  the  estate  had  been  paid  to  the  other  devisees  and  dis- 
tributees as  an  equivalent  for  the  use  and  occupation.  It*  is 
a  case  of  "waste  or  loss,"  in  the  hands  of  the  prior  devisee, 
referred  to  in  the  fourth  section  of  the  testator's  will,  for 
which  the  executors  are  exonerated  from  liability.  But 
while  I  do  not  see  that  any  part  of  the  estate  of  T.  Bennett 
Lucas  is  so  specifically  affected  by  this  application  of  a  por- 
tion of  his  share  in  the  estate  of  Jonathan  Lucas,  as  to  be 
liable  to  the  claim  of  the  children  now  before  the  Court,  it 
is  clear  to  my  mind  that  the  $2,400  44  having  been  appro- 
priated to  a  personal  obligation  of  their  father,  his  general 
estate  should  be  held  liable  for  it,  and  this  being  insolvent. 


21 

the  children  are  entitled  to  come  in  pari  2)assu  with  the 
other  creditors  and  prove  against  the  estate  the  amount  so 
due  to  them.     And  I  so  find. 

As  already  stated,  the  widow  postpones  her  claim  for 
dower  out  of  so  much  of  the  land  as  nuiy  he  held  suhject 
to  the  claim  of  licr  children.  This  renders  necessary  an 
apportionment  of  their  claim  for  $25,000,  hereinbefore  al- 
lowed as  distinguishable  from  the  })ropcrty  of  the  general 
estate  of  T.  Bennett  Lucas,  between  the  realty  and  person- 
alty in  which  the  said  sum  was  received.  The  West  Point 
lands,  as  previously  shown,  were  sold  for  $97,000.  The 
thirty-six  negroes  and  the  schooner  llettiwan,  for  $-31,322. 
A  rateable  apportionment  of  $25,000  between  these  sums, 
results  in  a  charge  upon  the  land  of  nineteen  and  a  half 
per  cent.,  or  $18,<J15.  One-sixth  of  this  sum,  or  $3,152  50, 
must,  therefore,  be  discounted  against  the  amount  herein- 
before assessed  for  the  widow's  dower. 

5.  The  simple  contract  demands,  presented  and  proved 
under  the  call  for  creditors  in  this  case,  are  set  forth  in  the 
schedule  marked  F.  Including  the  claim  of  the  children 
ranked  in  this  class,  these  debts  amount  to  $172,845  36. 
If  the  findings  of  this  report,  as  to  the  claims  entitled  to 
priority  of  payment,  are  sustained  b}-  the  Court,  the  surplus 
applicable  to  the  simple  contract  debts  will  be  $16,507  50, 
or  a  fraction  over  nine  and  a  half  per  cent,  of  said  debts. 
The  following  statement  will  exhibit  this  result : 

Debts  ranked  as  specialty % $88,355  04 

Dower  of  widow $16,126  91 

Less  postponed  to  claim  of  children..     3,152  50 

$12,974  41 

Claim  of  children,  specific  lien 25,000  00 

Simple   contract   demands,    $172,845  35 — 9^i 

per  cent 16,507  50 

The  total  agreein<i:  with  the  amount  of  assets 

in  executor's  hands $142,836  95 

as  hereinbefore  reported. 

Respectful!}'  submitted, 

JAMES  TUPPER, 

llaster  in  JEquitjj. 
September  3,  1861. 


22 


TESTIMONY 


Master's  Office,  26th  November,  1860. 

Theodore  Stoney,  sworn— says :  Is  oiic'of  executors  of  will 
of  T.  B.  Lucas;  the  only  outstanding  bond  of  his  testator 
unpaid  is  a  bond  of  Wm.  Whaley,  administrator,  for  $3,500, 
on  which  his  testator  was  surety  for  J.  B.  Campbell,  Esq. 
There  is  due  to  sundry  banks  on  notes,  $105,050  ;  Notes  to 
individuals  not  in  bank,  $8,136  87 ;  Bills  of  exchange,  claim- 
ed as  si)ccialty  debt,  $141,885  67. 

On  this  last  sum  $40,000  has  been  paid  from  the  policy 
of  insurance  on  testator's  life;  the  balance  of  last  item  is 
subject  to  fui-lher  reduction  by  whatever  may  be  received 
on  certain  collaterals  in  hands  of  parties  claiming  under 
said  bills  of  exchange.  There  are,  also,  claims  on  open 
accounts  by  sundry  creditors,  amounting  to  $48,719  94. 

All  the  assets  have  been  converted  except  a  tract  of  land 
in  St.  Thomas'  Parish  of  little  value,  and  sundry  outstand- 
ing accounts,  amounting  to  about  $9,000;  these  are  sup- 
posed to  be  good.  The  cash  balance  in  executors'  hands,  as 
per  account  rendered,  is  $90,510  31. 

In  addition  to  this  sum,  there  is  in  the  Savinsrs  Bank, 
deposited  by  executors  to  meet  widow's  claim  of  dower, 
$25,000 ;  of  which  $4,500  was  deposited  on  12th  December, 
1859,  and  $20,500  was  deposited  on  29th  March,  1860. 
(Signed)  THEODORE  STONEY, 

Executor  Estate  of  T.  B.  Lucas. 

Master's  Office,  21th  Novaubcr,  1860. 
./.  K.  Sass,  sworn — says :  Is  President  of  the  Bank  of 
Charleston ;  certain  drafts  were  drawn  by  T.  B.  Lucas,  in 
his  lifetime,  on  Thomas  Scott,  of  New  Y^ork,  tlirough  the 
Bank  of  Charleston,  the  Planters'  and  Mechanics'  Bank, 
the  People's  Bank,  Bank  of  South  Carolina,  Union  Bank, 
and  Farmers'  and  Exchange  Bank.  These  drafts  amount 
in  the  aggregate  to  $96,500;  on  this  sum  about  $39,000  has 
been  [)aid  from  the  proceeds  of  certain  policies  of  life  insu- 


•23 

ranee  assigned  by  the  said  T.  B.   Lucas,  the  bahince  is 

secured  by  the  following  collaterals : 

Bond  of  H.  E.   Lucas  and  interest,  15th  October, 

1858 ^31,500 

36|  shares  Cannonsboro'  Mill  and  AVharf  Company. 
1    bond  of  T.  B.  Lucas,  S.  G.  Oourtenav  and  C. 

H.  Simonton ". 1,400 

1    bond  of  T.  B.  Lucas,  S.  G.  Coiirtenav  and  C. 

H.  Simonton ! 2,000 

These  collaterals  were  assigned  by  Lucas  to  Scott,  and 
by  Scott  turned  over  to  witness  to  be  collected  and  applied 
to  the  payment  on  the  said  drafts  ratoably  among  the  said 
banks.  The  bond  of  IL  E.  Lucas,  for  $31,500,  is  secured 
by  a  second  mortgage  of  a  plantation  on  North  Santee — 
cannot  say  to  what  extent  this  is  avaihil)]e. 

The  shares  in  the  Cannonsboro'  Mill  and  Wharf  Com- 
pany, he  thinks,  are  w^orth  about  $15,000.  An  offer  was 
made  by  the  President  of  the  Company  to  pay  $10,000,. 
and  take  the  shares  in  full  settlement  of  all  demands  be- 
tween the  estate  of  T.  B.  Lucas  and  said  Company.  This 
offer  was  not  accepted. 

The  two  bonds  of  Lucas,  Courtenay  and  Simonton,  are 
secured  by  a  mortgage,  and  are  supposed  to  be  good. 

Witness  represents  claims  against  the  estate  of  T.  B. 
Lucas,  on  drafts  unsecured  by  collaterals,  amounting  to 
$12,000.  These  are  drafts  on  Wilbur  &  Price,  of  ilew 
York,  and  accepted  by  them. 

The  acceptors  of  these  drafts  have  not  paid  them — they 
are  under  protest. 

There  are  other  drafts  held  by  banks  in  the  city  which 
are  not  secured;  does  not  know  the  amounts  of  these  drafts, 
or  by  what  banks  they  are  held. 

The  Bank  of  Charleston  holds  claims  on  the  estate  of 
T.  B.  Lucas  on  promissory  notes. 

The  bond  of  II.  E.  Lucas,  for  $31,500  is  secured  by 
a  mortgage  of  Crow  Island,  and  an  adjoining  tract  of 
one  hundred  acres,  and  by  twenty-seven  negroes.  Witness 
thinks  there  is  a  prior  mortgage  incumbrance  on  the  land,- 
but  not  on  the  negroes. 

(Signed)  J.  K.  SASS,  President. 


24 


MAiSTEu's  Office,  2(1  Fchrmrj/,  1861. 
Ravenel  vs.  Lucas. 

M.  P.  Maifh'icsscn,  sworn — says:  The  statement  of  tlie 
iifFairs  of  tlie  assigned  estate  of  Ilenrv  E.  Lucas,  marked 
A,  is  submitted  by  him  as  a  correct  abstract  of  the  assets 
and  liabilities  of  the  said  estate. 

M.  P.  MATTIIIESSEN, 

Af^eut  of  Q'cdiiors. 
Sworn  to  before  me,  this  2d  Februar}',  1861. 

James  TirPEii,  blaster  in  E<]uit)j. 

t^taiement  of  affairs  of  Henri/  E.  Lucas,  of  North  Santce. 

LIABILITIES. 

Bond  secured  hj  first  mortgage  of  Crow  Island 
plantation,  on  North  Santce  river,  to  W.  C. 
Heyward $6,733  00 

Bond  secured  by  first  mortgage  of  Woodside 
plantation,  on  North  Santce,  and  thirty-seven 
negroes  to  trustee  of  Mrs.  Ewbank 6,871  95 

Bond  secured  by  second  mortgage  of  Woodside 
plantation,  on  North  Santee,  and  thirty-seven 
negroes  to  Miss  Rosa  Lucas 7,133  23 

Bond  to  T.  B.  Lucas,  secured  by  second  mort- 
gage on  Crow  Island 

First  mortgage  on  Kinloch  ^wamp 

First  mortgage  on  twenty-six  negroes 31,500  00 

Bond  to  Wm.  Hume,  secured  by  mortgage  of 

one  negro 859  57 

Interest  due  on  above,  about 4,000  00 

Balance  due  Touey  Weston 1,000  00 


$58,097  75 


ASSETS. 

Crow  Island  plantation  on  North  Santee  river, 
with  two  hundred  and  fifty  acres  rice  land 


25 

under  bank,  no  high  land — pnrcliased  four 
years    since    from    Master    in    Equity,    for 

$10,000 $20,000  00 

Woodside  plantation  on   North   Santee   river, 
one  hundred  acres  rice  land  under  bank,  two 

hundred  and  fifty  high  land 1 0,000  00 

Seventy-five  negroes,  at  $600 45,000  00 

Kinloch  swamp  on  Santee 500  00 

Summer  house  on  South  Santee 500  00 

$76,000  00 

Assets $76,000  00 

Liabilities 59,000  00 

Surplus $17,000  00 

Jas.  B.  Campbell,  sworn — says:  The  bond  of  witness  for 
$3,500,  now  held  by  W.  Whaley,  adm'r,  Avas  given  for  the 
purchase  money  of  ten  slaves  bought  by  witness  from  the 
estate  of  Geo.  ]^.  Morris,  and  said  bond  was  secured  by  a 
mortgage  of  the  said  slaves  and  by  the  personal  security  of 
T.  B.  Lucas  as  a  joint  obligor  of  said  bond;  witness  is  in 
possession  of  the  said  negroes. 

JAS.  B.  CAMPBELL. 

Sworn  to  before  me,  this  4th  Feb.,  1861. 

James  Tupper,  Master  in  Equity. 

Jos.  B.  Campbell,  sworn — says:  Crow  Island  was  sold  by 
the  ^faster  for  $10,000;  very  soon  after  this  sale  it  could 
'have  been  resold  for  about  $15,000;  Mr.  Lucas  put  exten- 
sive improvements  upon  it;  witness,  from  his  confidential 
intercourse  with  Ilenrj'  E.  Lucas  and  T.  Bennett  Lucas, 
and  his  knowledge  of  the  property,  came  to  the  conclusion 
that  the  property  was  Avorth,  about  two  or  two  and  a  half 
years  ago,  $25,000;  witness  has  no  doubt  that  it  would  be 
a  cheap  property  now  at  $15,000. 

JAS.  B.  CAMPBELL. 

Sworn  to  before  me,  this  26th  April,  1861. 
James  Tupper,  llaster  in  Equity. 


26 


I  think  tliat  tlio  interest  of  tlio  estate  of  T.  B.  Lucas,  in 
the  Cannonsboro"  Wharf  and  Mill  Company,  subject  to  the 
claims  upon  the  same,  is  worth  from  $10,000  to  $12,000. 

C.  M.  FURMAN. 
26th  Xoveml)er,  1860. 


Testimony  on  Claim  of  J.  15.  Campi5i:ll,  Usq. 

Master's  Office,  1st  Mai/^  1861. 

P.  .7.  Barbot,  sworn — says:  The  city  bonds  referred  to  in 
the  executors'  account  with  Mr.  Campbell  were  delivered 
to  Mr.  Campbell  on  the  25th  Sept.,  1857. 

Cross-examined  by  Mr.  Cavipbell. — Understood  that  Mr. 
Campbell  acted  for  Mr.  Lucas  as  a  friend;  knows  that  Mr. 
Campbell  was  employed  by  Mr.  T.  B.  Lucas  to  attend  to 
business  for  IL  E.  Lucas,  senior;  knows  that  Mr.  Campbell 
did  business  for  Mr.  T.  B.  Lucas  for  a  long  period;  there 
were  frequent  and  daily  consultations;  did  a  good  deal; 
remembers  that  Mr.  Campbell  acted  for  Mr.  Lucas  in  the 
purchase  of  the  West  Point  Mill  property,  but  understood 
from  Mr.  Lucas  that  Mr.  Campbell  w^as  acting  for  him  as  a 
friend;  that  he  was  under  some  obligation;  Mr.  Cami)bell 
acted  for  Mr.  Lucas  in  all  his  transactions. 

(Mem.  check  of  T.  B.  Lucas,  for  $7,050,  dated  12th  Sep- 
tember, 1857,  i)ut  in  evidence  by  Mr.  Cam[)bcll,  with 
sundry  endorsements.) 

(Letter  of  J.  B.  Campbell  to  Mr.  Lucas,  put  in  evidence^ 
by  Mr.  Jervey.) 

Sworn  to  before  me,  this  1st  May,  1861. 

Jambs  Tupper,  Master  in  Equity. 

G.  W.  Dingle,  sworn  :  The  title  deeds  and  mortgages 
referred  to  in  Mr.  Campbell's  bill  against  Henry  E.  Lucas, 
senior,  was  prepared  by  Mr.  Campbell  ;  Mr.  T.  Bennett 
Lucas  was  frequently  in  the   oflice  of  Mr.  Campbell ;  Mr. 


27 

Campbell  attended  to  some  case  for  Mr.  Lucas,  in  wliicli 
Henry  Willis  was  a  party ;  also  a  case  about  damaged  rice. 

Sworn  to  before  me,  tins  1st  May,  1861. 

James  Tupper,  Master  in  Equity. 

Henrii  Bui.st,  Es/j.,  sworn :  Witness  regards  the  Jirst  item 
in  the  bill  of  Mr.  Campbell  as  reasonable ;  as  to  the  second 
item,  can  say  nothing ;  thinks  ^200  a  reasonable  charge  for 
pre[)ai'ing  conveyances  and  examining  title  to  property 
referred  to  in  second  item  ;  thinks  fourth  item  reasonable  ; 
the  fifth  item  knows  nothing  about. 

As  for  bill  for  services  rendered  for  Henry  E.  Lucas, 
senior,  says  :  First  item,  knows  nothing ;  the  other  items  are 
reasonable,  except  the  last  item,  about  which  he  knows 
nothing. 

Sworn  to  before  me,  this  1st  May,  1861. 

James  Tupper,  Master  in  Equity. 

Jacob  Cohen,  sworn — says :  His  charge  as  agent  for  nego- 
tiating the  purchase  of  the  West  Point  Mill  establishment 
would  be  $1,000.  If  there  be  extra  labor  and  services  an 
additional  charge  Avould  be  made  ;  the  minimum  charge 
for  the  si)ecial  service  above  referred  to  would  be  $1,000. 

JACOB  COHEK 
Sworn  to  before  me,  this  2d  May,  1861. 

James  Tupper,  Master  in  Equity. 

4 


Affidavits  annexed  to  Claim  of  J.  B.  Campbell,  Esq. 
Personally  appeared  J.  B.  Campbell,  Esq.,  and  makes  oath 
that  the  foregoing  account  is  for  services  actually  rendered, 
and  that  the  charges  for  the  same  are  fair  and  just — and 
that  the  other  items  are  correct,  subject  to  such  discounts 
as  may  be  established  by  the  Estate  of  the  late  T.  B.  Lucas. 

JAMES  B.  CAMPBELL. 
Sworn  to  before  me,  this  30th  April,  1861. 

James  Tupper,  Master  in  Equity. 


28 

Additional  affidavit  of  Mr.  Campbell,  wlio.  lieiiiix  sworn — 
says,  that 

The  foregoing  is  not,  and  docs  not,  purport  to  he  a  full 
statement  of  his  side  of  the  account  between  himself  and 
the  late  T.  B.  Lu'-as.  The  same  was  not  filed  hy  him  as 
his  claim  in  the  Master's  office,  nor  was  it  made  up  for  that 
purpose.  The  circumstances  under  which  said  statement 
of  account  was  made  will  be  understood  by  the  letter  ap- 
pended to  it,  and  are  as  follows :  The  executors  of  Mr. 
Lucas  made  a  claim  upon  Mr.  Campbell  and  commenced 
suit  thereon.  Mr.  Campbell  thereupon  made  out  the  skel- 
eton account  above,  selecting  such  items  of  services,  etc., 
as  were  easily  proved  or  known  to  Mr.  Memminger,  the 
attorney  of  the  executors,  and  was  submitted  to  him  for 
the  consideration  of  the  executors  whether  it  was  worth 
wdiile  for  them  to  press  their  suit,  seeing  that  the  balance 
would  be  against  the  estate  if  the  items  ^\•erc  charged  at 
low  rates.  Messrs.  Memminger,  Jervey  and  AVilkinson,  or 
the  executors,  placed  the  account  and  letter  in  the  Master's 
office,  and  afterward  Mr.  Campbell,  at  the  suggestion  of 
the  Master,  added  the  amounts  to  each  item  which  were 
previously  left  blank, 

Mr.  Campl)ell  claims  the  right  now  to  make  }troof  of  his 
claim,  generally,  not  only  for  services  but  also  for  moneys 
due  to  him  otherwise,  and  especially  for  the  sum  of  about 
twelve  hundred  dollars,  being  Mr.  Campbell's  share  of 
amount  of  neiz-ro  hire  and  freight  erroneouslv  charged  in 
account  of  Cannonsboro'  Mill  and  paid  by  Mr.  Campbell, 
lL)Ut  were  admitted  or  allowed  to  be  correct.  The  circum- 
stances under  which  said  payment  and  other  payments  were 
made,  viz :  the  retention  by  JMr.  Lucas  of  money  in  his 
hands,  will  appear  in  evidence. 

JAMES  B.  CAMPBELL. 

Sworn  to  before  me,  this  1st  May,  18G1. 

James  T upper,  Master  in  Equity. 


29 


A. 

[copy  of  will  'of  JONATHAN  LUCAS.] 

State  of  SoiUh  Carolina  : 

I,  Jonathan  Lucas,  of  Charleston,  do  make  and  ordain 
this  to  be  my  last  will  and  testament. 

I  give,  devise,  and  heqncath,  all  my  estate  and  propevt}', 
of  every  kind,  nnto  my  executors,  or  such  of  them  as  shall 
qualify  upon  this  my  will,  and  to  the  survivors  and  survivor 
of  them  in  trust,  that  they  shall  manage  and  conduct  my 
mills  and  planting  establishments  hy  such  tilting  agents, 
and  in  such  manner  as  they  shall  deem  most  for  the  advan- 
tage of  my  family,  until  all  my  children  shall  marry,  or 
attain  twentj'-one  years  of  age,  or  until  my  last  surviving 
minor  child  shall  depart  this  life  ;  and  in  the  meantime 
my  said  executors  shall  apply  the  net  income  to  the  pay- 
ment of  my  debts,  and  to  the  su})port  and  education  of  my 
children  who  may  be  unmarried  and  under  twenty-one 
years,  and  also  to  the  support  and  education  of  the  child  or 
children  of  any  of  my  children  who  have  already  died,  or 
who  ma}'  hereafter  die  before  the  time  a^jpointed  for  the 
division  of  my  estate;  the  surplus  income,  if  any,  to  be 
applied  at  the  discretion  of  my  executors  to  the  advance- 
ment of  my  other  children  who  are  or  may  Ijccome  adult, 
or  to  be  invested  and  abide  tho  iinal  distribution  of  my 
estate. 

2.  "When  all  my  children  shall  have  married,  or  attained 
twenty-one  years  of  age,  or  when  my  last  surviving  minor 
child  shall  depart  this  life  under  twenty-one,  in  case  that 
should  happen  to  occur,  then  my  executors  shall  divide  and 
apportion  all  my  estate,  as  it  shall  then  stand,  in  equal  parts 
among  all  my  children  who  shall  be  living  when  the  last 
of  my  minor  children  surviving  each  other  shall  marry  or 
attain  twenty-one  years  of  age,  or  shall  happen  to  die  be- 
fore attaining  such  age.  But  grandchildren  shall  be  substi- 
tuted in  the  place  of  any  parent  Avho  is  now  dead  or  who 
may  hereafter  die,  ar.d   shall   take  respectively  the  share 


30 

which  the  parent,  if  living,  would  have  taken.  And  my 
executors  shall  take  care  that  the  share  of  each  daughter,  or 
of  a  suhstitnted  granddaughter,  p;hall  he  settled  to  h.er  sole 
use,  free  from  the  deht  or  engagements  of  any  husliand  she 
may  marry. 

3.  I  expressly  subject  each  and  every  sliare  given  as 
aforesaid  to  the  following  lin\itations:  that  is  to  say.  in  case 
any  of  my  children  shall  die  without  leaving  issue,  living 
at  the  time  of  its  decease,  or  in  case  sucli  issue  ot  any  child 
shall  die  unmarried,  and  under  twenty-years  of  age,  the 
share  of  such  child  shall  revert  to  my  estate,  and  he  equally 
divided  among  my  other  children,  living  at  the  happening 
of  such  contingenc}' ;  or  in  case  of  the  death  of  any  child 
having  issue  alive  at  the  happening  of  such  contingency, 
such  issue  to  represent  the  deceased  parent,  and  to  he  enti- 
tled to  take  a  share  in  common  with  the  other  children. 
And  the  same  rules  shall  ap[)]y  to  every  accruing  or  sur- 
vived share,  as  to  the  original  one.  And  all  these  Hmita- 
tions  and  conditions  shall  ap}»]y  as  well  to  the  share  of  my 
daughter  who  has  alread}^  died  and  has  left  issue,  as  aiso  to 
any  others  of  my  children  who  may  die,  either  before  or 
after  me. 

3.  I  appoint  my  executors  to  be  guardians  of  my  minor 
children,  authorizing  them- to  expend  upon  their  education 
whatever  sums  they  may  see  fit.  And  inasmuch  as  my 
elder  children  have  had  the  benefit  of  their  education  from 
my  estate,  the  charges  for  the  maintenance  and  education 
of  my  said  minor  children  shall  be  borne  by  my  general 
estate,  and  shall  not  be  charged  to  the  separate  account  of 
the  children. 

4.  I  authorize  my  executors,  from  time  to  time,  to  make 
advancements  to  my  children  to  an  extent  not  exceeding  the 
presumptive  share  of  each,  and  to  deliver  the  possession 
and  control  of  the  same  to  any  child  at  any  time  they,  the 
said  executors,  shall  see  fit.  Such  advancements,  liowever, 
together  with  all  which  may  have  been  made  by  myself, 
shall  be  charged  against  the  shares  of  each  child  to  Axhom 
the  same  may  have  been  made,  and  shall  constitute  a  part 
thereof  in  the  final  division. 


31 

The  advancements  Avliich  may  be  made  to  any  daughter 
shall  be  settled  in  manner  already  declared  ;  and  I  expressly 
exonerate  my  executors  from  liability  for  any  waste  or  loss 
which  may  accrue  to  any  advancement  or  share  delivered 
in  pursuance  of  this,  my  will.  And,  I  also  declare,  that 
they  are  to  be  indemnified  by  my  estate  for  every  liability, 
loss  or  expense  incurred,  and  shall  be  held  accountable  for 
no  errors  of  judgment  in  their  conduct  as  executors  and 
trustees. 

5.  I  authorize  and  empower  my  executors  to  sell  and 
convey  any  portion  of  my  estate  which  they  may  deem 
expedient,  either  for  the  purpose  of  ]»aying  debts  or  making 
a  division,  or  in  the  conduct  or  management  of  the  busi- 
ness. And  if  in  their  opinion  circumstances  should  require 
a  di\ision  of  my  estate,  in  whole  or  in  part,  before  the 
period  which  I  have  named,  I  fully  authorize  nn*  executors 
to  make  such  division,  and  to  deliver  the  property  into  the 
hands  of  the  legatees  and  devisees — such  property,  how- 
ever, to  remain  subject  in  their  hands  to  the  limitations 
ali-eady  declared. 

G.  It  is  my  desire  that  my  Middleburg  plantation  and 
negroes,  with  appurtenances,  should,  if  possible,  be  kept  in 
my  family.  I  therefore  authorize  and  empower  my  execu- 
tors to  sell  and  assign  the  same  to  some  one  of  my  children, 
such  as  the  said  executors  sliall  deem  best;  and  in  order  to 
enal»le  such  child  to  pay  for  the  same,  the  executors  shall 
tix  upon  the  property  what  they  consider  a  fair  price,  and 
may  make  the  terms  of  the  sale  such  as  they  may  deem 
most  advisable  to  effect  the  object  in  view.  And  they 
shall  be  authorized  to  assign  to  an}'  other  of  the  children 
in  part  or  in  entire  satisfaction  of  their  shares,  as  the  same 
may  reach,  so  much  of  bonds  or  securities,  taken  for  the 
purchase,  as  they  may  deem  expedient. 

7.  I  appoint  my  friend  AVilliam  Lucas,  C.  G.  Memmin- 
ger  and  W.  J.  Bennett,  to  be  executors  of  this,  my  will, 
and  I  authorize  a  majority  of  those  of  them  who  may 
quality  and  be  alive  to  do  all  the  acts  which  my  executors 
are  hereinbefore  authorized  to  do  ;  and  if  there  be  but  one. 


32 

then  I  authorize  that  one  ;  and  I  do  hc)-ol)y  re\-oke  all  otlior 
wills  hy  nie  at  any  time  made. 

Witness  my  hand  and  seal,  at  Charleston,  this  2")th  Au- 
gust, in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hun- 
dred and  forty-seven.     Signed,  sealed,  ]in1)lislied  and 

decreed  l)y  the  said  Jonathan  Lueas,  ) 

1  ,.     1  •    1     ,     .,,       ^  i.    i.  4.    >   Jon.  Lucas, 

as  and  lor  ins  last  will  and  testament,  J 

iu  the  presence  of  us,  the  undersigned  witnesses,  who. 

at  his  request,  in  his  presence  and  in  the  presence  of 

each  other,  have  hereunto  subserihed  our  names  the 

day  and  year  above  written. 

^[ic'k   JoIIXST(^N'. 

■  .  Elias  S.  Bknni;tt. 

Benj.  AV.  PiiisE. 

Proved  before  M.  T.  Mendenhall,  Esq.,  Ordinary  for 
Charleston  District,  10th  May,  A.  D.,  1848;  and  on  28d 
June,  A.  D.,  1848,  William  Lucas,  C.  G.  Mcmminger  and 
W.  J.  Bennett,  Esqs.,  qualified  as  executors  thereof. 

Ordinary's  Office,  ChnrlesUw  District,  May,  A.  7).,  lS4'.t. 


EXHIBITS. 


B. 

Assets  of  Estate  of  Thomas  Bennett  Lucas. 

Cash  balance  in  hands  of  executors 

19th  May,  1860 $90,510  31 

Cash  deposited  in  Savings  Institu- 
tion, 12th  December,  1859 $4,500  00 

Cash  deposited  in  Savings  Institu- 
tion, 29th  March,   1860 20,500  00 

115,510  31 

Bond  of  Edward  S.  Lucas,  22d  Xo- 

vember,  1859 $13,000  00 

Bond  of  J.  K.  Bevin  and  H.  Bul- 

wiukle,  13th  March,  1860 144  00 

Bond  of  John   Shendan  and  John 

Blake,  13th  March,  1860 654  00 

Bond  of  J.  II.  Behling,  29th  March, 

1860 754  00 

Bond  of  J.  K.  and  W.   C.  Dukes, 

27th  March,  1860 2,287  00 

Bond  of  C.  A.  and  R.  G.  Chisolm, 

13th  March,  1860 834  00 

Bond  of  J.   R.   Baker  and  W.  S. 

Elliott,  13th  March,  1860 467  00 

18,140  00 

Account  of  Simmons  Lucas,  Sr $3,350  70 

H.  E.  Lucas,  Sr 4,863  60 

B.  J.  Johnson 122  16 

"  Simmons  Lucas,  Jr 360  35 

"  Thomas  M.  AVaguer....         489  83 

9,186  64 

$142,836  95 
3 


34 

C. 

Liabilities  of  Estate  of  T.  B.  Lucas. 

BOND 

Of  James  B.  Campbell  and  Thomas  Bennett  Lucas, 
conditioned  for  the  payment  to  William  Whaley,  ad- 
ministrator of  Dr.  G.  W.  Morris,  of  $8,500,  in  live  equal 
annual  instalments  with  interest,  payable  annually  upon 
the  whole  amount  unpaid.  Bond  dated  •20th  January, 
1858 ;  interest  paid  to  1st  March,  1859. 

Amount  of  bond $3,500  00 

1860. 
March  1,  one  year's  interest  due  this  date 245  00 

3,745  00 

1861. 
March  1,  one  year's  interest  on  $3,745 262  15 

4,007  15 
April    1,  one  month's  interest  on  $4,007.15 23  37 

$4,030  52 


35 


FOREIGN  BILLS  OF  EXCHANGE 

Rendered  against  estate  of  Thomas  Bennett  Lucas, 
deceased,  and  claimed  to  be  specialty  debts — interest  com- 
puted to  1st  April,  1861  : 

Acceptances  of  Wilbur  &  Price. 
1859. 
Oct.  2-1. — Bank  of  Charleston  : 

Draft S5,500  00 

Protest 85 

Interest 534    77 

S6,035  62 

Dee.    8.—      Do.       Draft 6,500  00 

Protest 85 

Interest 584  65 

7,085  50 

Damages 1,200  00 

$14,321   12 

Oct.  15. —  Union  Bank: 

Draft 6,500  81 

Interest 663  26 

7,164  07 

Nov.  29.—       Do.       Draft 1,400  00 

Interest 131   02 

1,531  02 

Damages 790  08 

9,485   17 

Dec.  IG.— State  Bank: 

Draft 6,000  00 

Interest 540  82 

6,540  82 

Damages 600  00 

7,140  82 

Nov.  26. — Farmers'  and  Exchange  Bank : 

Draft 6,600  00 

Interest 620  22 

7,220  22 

Damages (560  00 

7,880  2J 

"     1. — Planters'  and  Mechanics'  Bank : 

Draft 3,000  00 

Interest 296  88 

3,296  88 

Damages 300  00 

3,596  «^ 

Carried  forward $42,424  21 


36 

Brouprht  forward $42,424  21 

Oct.  24. — Bank  of  South  Carolina  : 

Draft 4,500  00 

Interest 452  37 

4,952  37 

Damages 450  00 

5,402  37 

Nov.    1. — Conner  S^' Co.: 

Draft 3,000  00 

Interest 296  88 

3,296  88 

Damages 300  00 

3,596  88 

S51,423  46 

Acceptances  of  Thomas  Scott. 
1859. 
Oct.  -28.— Bank-  of  Charlesion  : 

Draft S2,600  00 

Int.  to  28th  Nov .       15  46 

2,615  46 
Then  paid 520  00 

2,095  46 
Int.  to  16th  Jan. ,'60.  .       19   70 

2,115   16 
Then  paid 260  00 

1,855   16 
Int.  to  28th  Feb 15  30 

1,870  46 
Then  paid 260  00 

1,610  46 
Int.  to  1st  April, '61.  .     122  88 

1,733  34 

Mot.  9.—        Do.       Draft 3,800  00 

Int.  to  28th  Nov 13  85 

3,813  85 
Then  paid 760  00 

Carried  forward 3,053  85      1,733  34 


87 


Brought  forward 3,053  85      1,733  34 

Int.  to  16th  Jan., '60.  .       28  68 


3,082  53 
Then  paid 38(t  00 


2,702  53 
Int.  to  28th  Feb 22  28 


2,721   81 
Tlien  paid 380  00 


2,344   81 
Int.  to  1st  April,  '61 .  .     1  78  02 

2,523    73 

Nov.  11. — Bank  of  Chnrleslon  : 

Draft 4,900  00 

Int.  to  28th  Nov 15  98 


4,915  98 
Then  paid 980  00 


3,935  98 
Int.  to  16th  Jan..  '60.  .      46  05 


3,982  03 
Then  paid 490  00 


3,492  03 
Int.  to  28th  Feb.,  '60.       28  83 


3,520  86 
Then  paid 490  00 


3,030  86 
Int.  to  1st  April, '61.  .     231   28 


1859. 

Nov.  1 5.—         Do.     Draft 2,500  00 

Int.  to  28th  Nov 6  23 

2,506  23 
Then  paid 500  00 


3,262   14 


2,006  23 
Int.  to  16th  Jan.,  '60.       18  85 


Carried  forward 2,025  08       7,519  21 


38 


Brouplit  forward 2,02.3  08      7,519  21 

Then  paid 2.-J0  00 

1,775  08 
Int.  to  28th  Vvh 14   64 

1.7SJ)    72 
Then  paid 250  00 


1,439  72 

Int.  to  1st  AjH-il.  '01.  .     109  83 

Nov.  18. — Bdiik  of  Charleston  : 

Draft 6,900  00 

Int.  to  28th  Nov 13  23 

6,913  23 

Then  paid 1.380  00 

5,533  23 

Int.  to  16th  Jan.,  '60.      52  00 


1,549  55 


5,585  23 
Then  paid 690  00 

4,895  23 
Int.  to  28th  Feb 40  35 


4,935  58 
Then  paid 690  00 

4,245  58 
Int.  to  1st  April '61.  .     324  02 

i ),.,..     8._         Do.     Draft 5,800  00 

Int.  on  $1,160,  amount 

rec'd  28th  Nov.,  '59      11   13 

5,788  87 
Paid  Nov.  28th,  '59.  .1,160  00 


4,569  60 


4,628  87 
Int.  to  16th  Jan.,  '60.      34  62 

4,663  49 
Then  paid 580  00 

4,083  49 
Int.  to  28th  FeVj 25  85 


Carried  forward 4,109  34     13,638  36 


39 


Brought  forward 4,10D  34    13,638  36 

Then  paid 580  00 


3,529  34 
Int.  to  1st  April,  '61 .  .     209  37 

3,798   71 


17,437  07 

Damages 2,650  00 

20,087  o; 

1859. 
Oct.  28.— Union  Bank : 

Draft 5,000  00 

Int.  to  29th  Nov 29   73 


5,029   73 
Then  paid 950  00 


4,079   73 
Int.  to  18th  Jan.,  '60.       39   12 


4,118  85 
Then  paid 475  00 


3,643  85 
Int.  to  28th  Feb 28  65 

3,6  72  50 
Then  paid 475  00 

3,197  50 
Int.  to  1st  April,  '61 .  .     243  44 


3,440  94 


Nov.  12.—      Do.         Draft 4,500  00 

Int.  to  29th  Nov 14  67 


4,514  67 
Then  paid 950  00 


3,564  67 
Int.  to  18th  Jan.,  '60.       34  18 


3,600  85 
Then  paid 475   00 


Carried  forward S3, 125  85      3,440  94     20,087  0< 


40 


Brou-jlit  forward 3.125  85      3,440  :)J      20.087  07 

Int.  to  2.stli   F.I).,  'GO.       24  57 


:1.150  42 
Then  paid 4  75  00 


2,675  42 
Int.  to  1st  April,  '<J1.  .     20.'{  29 


2..S7S   71 


(i,319  G5 
Damages 950  00 

1859. 
Oct.  20. — Bank  of  Sort/h  Carolina: 

Draft 6,500  00 

Int.  to  28th  Nov 48  61 


6,548  61 
Then   paid .3,500  00 


3,048  61 
Int.  to  18th  Jan..  '60.       29  81 


;i,078  42 
Then   paid l,75o  00 


1,328  42 
Int.  to  1st  April,  '61 .  .     Ill   30 


28.—      Do.       Draft 3,000  '00 

Int.  to  20th  Feb.,  '60..      66   16 


1,439   72 


3,066   16 
Then   paid 1,750  00 


Nov.     7-.—      Do.       Draft 3,600  00 

Interest 351   42 


1,316   16 
Int.  to  1st  April,  '61.  .     101   97 

1,418  13 

3,951  42 

4,82(»  23 

11,629  50 

Damages 1 ,750  00 


18.—       Do.       Draft 4,400  00 

Interest 420  23 


7,269  65 


13,379  50 

Carried  foi'ward 40,736  22 


41 

Brought  forward 40,736  22 

Nov.  19. — Conner  lS'  Co.  : 

Draft 3,000  00 

Interest 285  94 

3.28.5  94 

Damages 300  00 

3..i8.j   !)4 


1859. 
Oct.  20. — Fanners^  and  Exchange  Bank: 

Draft 4.000  00 

Int.  to  28tliNov 29  92 


44,322   16 


4,029  92 
Then  paid 3.760  00 


269  92 
Int.  to  1st  April,  '61.  .       25  25 


28.—       Do.        Draft 2,300  00 

Int.  to  18th  Jan.,  '60.       36   17 


295   17 


2,336   17 
Then  paid 1,880  00 


45G   17 
Int.  to  1st  April,  '61.  .       38  22 


494  39 


Nov.     7.—      Do.       Draft 3,400  00 

Int.  to  28th  Feb.,  '60 .       73  68 


3,473   68 
Then  paid 1,880  00 


1,593  68 
Int.  to  1st  April,  '61.  .     120  45 


ll._      Bj.       Draft 5,100  00 

Interest 493  93 


1,714  13 
5,593  93 

4,377  42 

12,475  04 

Damages 1,880  00 

14,355  04 


24.—      Do.       Draft 4,000  00 

Interest 377  42 


Can-ied   forward 58,677  20 


42 

Brou^rlit  forward 58,677  20 

Oct.  22. — Planters'  ami  Mechanics'  Bank: 

Draft 5,000  00 

Int.  to  28th  Nov 35  48 


5,035  48 
Then  paid 3,210  00 


1,795  48 
Int.  to  17th  Jan..  GO.  .       17  20 


1,812  68 
Then  paid 1,620  00 


192  68 
Int.  to  1st  April,  'Gl.  .       16   18 


1859. 
Nov.  13.—     Do 


Draft 5,000  00 

Interest 482  33 


Dec.    3.—      Do.       Draft 6,200  00 

Int.  to  28th  Feb.,  '60.     103  45 


208  86 


5,482  33 


6,303  45 
Then   paid 1,620  00 


4,683  45 
Int.  to  April  1,  '61.  .  .     355  68 


5,039   13 

10,730  32 

Damages 1,620  00 

12,350  32 

Nov.  24. — People's  Bank: 

"^  Draft 5,000  00 

Int.  to  28th  Nov 3  84 


5,003  84 
Then  paid 1,000  00 


4,003  84 
Int.  to  18th  Jan.,  '60..       39   15 


CaiTied  forward 4,042  99  71,027  52 


43 


Brought  forward 4,042,99  71,027  52 

Then  paid 500  00 


3,542  99 
Int.  to  28th  Feb 27  85 


3,570  84 
Then  paid 500  00 


3,070  84 
Int.  to  1st  April,  '01 .  .     233   22 

3,304  06 

Damages 500  00 

3,804  06 


74,831   58 
Acceptances  of  Wilbur  &  Price  brought  down 51,423  46 

$126,255  04 


44 


Account  Sales  of  36  Negroes  and  Schooner  Hettiwan, 
(embraced  in  "West  Point  Mill"  purchase). 

Brought  forward  .^1 7,394 

Charles $    690         Archy 774 

Thomas 774         Adam 410 

Lewis   800         Kiehard l,o2o 

Charles 800         John  L (100 

Natt 1,440         Edward 1,100 

Philip 1,100         John  V I,0o0 

Chance 1,200         Jack 120 

Gibby 1,100         CharlesB SaO 

George 575        Tom  P :^50 

Caesar 575         Quannino 880 

Charles  T 1,700         Tom  11 140 

John 1,850         Tom  P 774 

John  B 780         June 1,600 

Paul  360         John 900 

David 1,875        Jeffrey 800 

Frank 550         George 500 

Marlboro  400         Gibbey 740 

Sam 825.        Henrv 660 


Carried  forward... $17, 394 


Gross  sales  of  negroes $30,997 

Sale  of  schooner  Hettiwan 325 


|131,322 


E. 

Assessment  of  Dower  of  Widow.  < 

Gross  receipts  by  executors,  as  per  their  account.$310,028  69 
Amount  of  uncollected  assets  in  their  hands....     27,326  64 


Gross  value  of  Estate $337,355 


45 

Deduct  disbursements  on  account  of 
mill  and  expenses  of  administra- 
tion   S55,188  27 

Also,  proceeds  of  sales  Real  Estate  : 

West  Point  Mill $97,000 

Dwelling-house 25,000 

Lot  on  Commercial  wbarf    1,825 
Lot  on  Palmetto  street....     1,130 

124,955  00 

180,143  27 


Value  of  personal  estate $157,212  06 

Deduct  bond  debts  secured  by  mort- 
gage of  personalty : 
Three  bonds  to  Rosa  Lucas,  Julius 
Lucas  and  Lucy  Lucas,  secured 
by  mortgage  of  West  Point 
lands,  thirt3'-six  negroes  and 
schooner.  Rateable  apportion- 
ment  of  debt   to  negroes  and 

schooner $15,988  96 

Bond  to  Augustus  Lucas,  secured 

by  mortgage  of  negroes 18,601  24 

.  Bond  to  I.  Ball,  guardian,  secured 

by  mortgage  of  negroes 17,552  39 

Bond  to  R.   DeTreville,  secured 

by  mortgage  of  negroes 23,929  44 

76,072  03 

Applicable  rateably  to  mortgages  on  land  and 

unsecured  specialty  debts $81,140  03 

Proportion  of  bonds  to  Rosa,  Julius 
and  Lucy  Lucas,  secured  by  mort- 
gage of  West  Point  lands 49,518  70 

Bond  to  M.  M.  Lucas,  secured  by 

mortgage  of  dwelling-house  lands    11,112  50 
Bond  to  P.  J.  Barbot,  unsecured..      2.626  88 

$63,258  08 


46 

Brought  forward $63,258  08 

Foreign  Bills  of  Excliangc  ranked 

as  specialty  88,355  04 

Amount  of  personalty,  mortgage  debts 

and  unsecured  specialty 151,013  12 

Per  centage  of  personalty  to  debts,  53^ 

Bonds  secured  by  mortgages  on  land    60,631  20 

Rateable  apportionment  of  person- 
alty to 32,437  69 

2S,1'J8  51 

Proceeds  sales  of  mortgage  lands. .  122,000  00 
Deduct  amount  appropriated  from 

personalty  '28,193  51 

Value  of  mortgage  lands  subject  to 

dower 93,806  49 

Add  lands  not  mortgaged  : 

Lot  on  Commercial  wharf    1,825 

Lot  on  Palmetto  street....     1,130      2,955  00 

Value  of  unincumbered  real  estate 96,761  49 

To  one-sixth  of  which,  or $16,126  91 

the  widow  is  entitled  for  her  dower. 


47 

F. 

SBIPLE  CONTRACT  CLAIMS 

Presented   against    estate   of   Thomas   Bennett  Lucas, 
deceased. 

Notes — Interest  computed  to  1st  April,  1861. 

1859. 
Oct.  13. — Bank  of  Charleston: 

Note 6,300  00 

Protest 2  00 

Interest 646  39 

6,948  39 

"     18. —      Do.        Note 4,200  00 

Protest 2  00 

Interest 426  90 

4,628  90 

"     31.—      Do.       Note 3,800  00 

Protest 2  00 

Interest 376   77 

4,178   77 

Dec.    5. —      Do.       Note 30,000  00 

Protest 2  00 

Interest 2,773  15 

32,775  15 

48,531   21 

Nov.    3. — Bank  of  South  Carolina: 

Note 5,000  00 

Interest 493  87 

5,493  87 

Dec.    1.—      Do.       Note 5,000  00 

Interest 466  66 

5,466  66 

10,960  53 

Oct.  21.— People's  Bank: 

Note 3,200  00 

Protest 2  00 

Interest 319  71 

3,521   71 

"     28.—      Do.       Note * 5,000  00 

Protest 2  00 

Interest 483  1 7 

• 5,485  17 

9,006  88 

Amount  carried   forward S68,498  62 


48 


Amount  brought  forward 

Nov.  10.— Bank  of  the  State: 

Note 2,800  00 

Protest 2  03 

Interest 271    71 


S68,498  62 


"     1 5. — Estate  of  H.  Mompoey : 

Note 800  00 

Interest 76  87 


Do.       Note 2,200  00 

Interest 222  38 


876  87 


2,411    38 


3,073    74 


1859. 
Dec.  24. — Estate  of  Francoise  Perrier  : 

Note 

Interest  six  per  cent. 

Oct.  12.— F.  C.  Blum  cV  Son: 

Note 

Interest 


April  4. — Dr.  Elias  Horlheck. 

Note 

Interest . 


Nov.    1. — Mills,  Beach  ^'  Co.: 

Note 

Protest  .  . 
Interest .  . 


1860. 
Jan.  28.— TF.  /.  Bemxett: 

Note 

Interest 

1859. 
Mar.  19.— H.  W.  Conner  &-  Co.: 

Mem.  Check 3,000  00 

Interest 426  90 


3,000 

00 

222 

98 

2,203 

78 

235 

34 

1,467 

06 

204 

26 

979 

55 

2 

00 

96 

93 

1,412 

59 

115 

6S 

3,288  25 


3,222  98 


2,529   12 


1,071   32 


1,078  48 


1,528   2: 


"     25.—      Do.       Mem.  Check 3,000  00 

Interest 423  45 


3,426  90 


3,423  45 


6,850  35 


Amount  carried  forward $91,741   13 


49 

Amount  brou{j;l>t  forward SOI  ,741    1 3 

18G0. 
Jan.  10. — Frederick  lik'har(h: 

Acceptance  of  bill 61f)  97 

Interest 57  68 

733  6.^ 

1 85!). 
Oct.    G. — Planters'  ant!  Mechnnicf:'  Bank  : 

Note 3,300  00 

Interest 342  39 

3,()42  39 

u      1 2.—      Do.        Note 6,000  00 

Interest 615  62 

6,615   62 

"      1 7.—       Do.        Note 950  00 

Interest 96  56 

1,046   56 

Nov.    3.—      Do.       Note 10,500  00 

Interest 1,035  04 

11,535  04 

Oct.  11.—       Do.        Note 1,500  00 

Interest 154   19 

1,654    19 

—    24,493  80 

"     21. — Farmer.^'  and  lixchamje  Bank  : 

Note 10,000  00 

Protest 2  00  ** 

Interest 1,008   77 

11,010   77 

Dec.     7.—       Do.        Note 4,000  00 

Protest 2  00 

Interest 368  22 

4,370  22 

15,380  99 


$132,349  57 
4 


.')() 


CLAIMS. 

O'llear,  Ropor  &  Stoney $ir),(iG7  88 

Cameron  &  Co 4,(515  05 

Ravciiel  &  Co 4,500  00 

Robertson,  Blaeklock  &  Co 1,471  41 

kobcrt.  Jordan 1,1<»S  34 

Ain^er  &  Bee  1,55(5  1)1 

S.  Z.  Pitcher '. IKil   54 

K.  &  W.  C.  IIorll>eek.. (540  (54 

Henry  Bnist 080  71 

Estate  of  J.  Charles  Blum  552  05 

Hill  &  Smith 503  98 

F.  C.  Blum  c^  Son  403  01 

Macbetli  &  Buist 370  00 

Lucas  &  Stroheckcr 305  84 

J.  B.  Duval  &  Son  357  97 

Carnialt  &  lii-iggs 342  54 

Klinck,  Wicke"nberg&Co 258  05 

J.  U.  Boesch 2o9  57 

L.  M.  Hatch 228  30 

James  Moore 219  33 

.feiinino-s,  Thomlinson  &  Co 198  00 

Mills,  i3each  &  Co 197  02 

llayclen&Whilden : 193  50 

F.  i).  C.  Krackc 189  8(5 

N"ayler,  Smith  .t  Co 108  96 

James  McLaren  '. 100  55 

S.  N.  Hart&  Co 135  64r 

James  B.  Campbell 101   31 

Thayer,  Brigliam  k  Field 119  41 

Bashiba  Smith 11(5  00 

William  Ravenel Ill  00 

Robert  Adger  &  Co 80  2a 

C.  IL  West  &  Son 82  51 

Graveley  &  Pringle  *. 78  89 

C.  F.  Colson 69  77 

St.  Paul's  Church  68  64 

Stoney  &  Wiltberger • 61  44 


51 

A.  F.  Tronche 59  51 

James  McConkey ■  59  00 

Matthiesaen,  O'Hara&Oo 53  37 

Commercial  Wharves 50  12 

Walker,  Evans  &  Co 39  55 

Dr.  William  T.  Wragg 38  00 

ITeiiry  Clark 35  57 

ir.  F.  Baker  &  C^) 31  00 

B.Ford 29  00 

Mount  Pleasant  Ferry  Company 28  00 

Adger's  Wliarf 27  28 

John  Boniiell 26  64 

Edgerton,  Richards  &  Co 25  13 

Land)erts  &  JLowell 24  00 

William  Scott 19  25 

C.  Amme 10  00 

Robert  Jenney 17  75 

Ravenel  &  Co 14  81 

Ilorton  &  Shepherd 14  (56 

Thomas  Kenney 13  69 

Hugh  F.Vincent 13  60 

Vanderhorst  Wharf.... 12  32 

A.  &  R.  B.  McKenzie 9  00 

F.  M.  Jones 8  25 

Alva  Gage  &  Co 6  56 

Benjamin  P.  Bicaise 5  81 

Richon  k  Travers ^ 5  00 

George  W.  Olney 4  75 

John  McKeegan 4  50 

David  Landreth  &  Co 2  50 

W.  J.  Bennett 108  67 


38,095  34 
Amount  of  Notes  brought  forward 132,349  57 


170,444  91 
Claim  of  Children,  ranked  as  simple  contract.. .     2,400  44 

$172,845  35 


1^«<T^ 


23171 


